No one has answer my question though. Why is having the option such a problem? If everyone said they wanted the option (even if you had no interest in using it) to have it or not then Microsoft would be compelled to give that option. No one has answered this yet.

Having options is never bad. Not having options is restrictive and lame.

I have answered your question. It's not bad to have the option. But the option is not there. Like Ice_Blue said, it's gone. It's not going to come back. Whining about it online will not help. Microsoft is not going to put it back in, no matter how many people whine about it online, especially in forums that they do not monitor. If you actually spend some time with it, you too will see that it's better than the start menu. This is why Microsoft removed it.

I know my corporation will not be rolling out Win 8 client. We will see how many others with very lucrative EA's fail to adopt it too. That will play a key factor in the options for Windows 9 imo.

All we can do is wait and see. A lot of corporations adopted 7 though, so start screen or not they wouldn't adopt Windows 8. Microsoft is sure to survey them to see why they skipped 8.

Note, I didn't say those who dislike the start screen or Windows 8 are "haters". By "haters" I meant those who judged Windows 8 without learning about it or giving it a fare chance. Here's the exact quote: "that many haters have never even learned to use Windows 8 efficiently before giving up." If you have actually used Windows 8 and know how it works and you sill don't like it, then it's fine. It is your opinion. You are not a hater.

No one has answer my question though. Why is having the option such a problem? If everyone said they wanted the option (even if you had no interest in using it) to have it or not then Microsoft would be compelled to give that option. No one has answered this yet.

Having options is never bad. Not having options is restrictive and lame.

I think it's because Microsoft felt that if they did that, people would not use the start screen. They are going all out with Metro, and obviously want it to become the new OS standard.Although I agree that even an obscure hack allowing the start menu would have placated a lot of people.

I think it's because Microsoft felt that if they did that, people would not use the start screen. They are going all out with Metro, and obviously want it to become the new OS standard.Although I agree that even an obscure hack allowing the start menu would have placated a lot of people.

There are start menu replacements that look just like the old start menu. xpclient is always talking about it.

No one has answer my question though. Why is having the option such a problem? If everyone said they wanted the option (even if you had no interest in using it) to have it or not then Microsoft would be compelled to give that option. No one has answered this yet.

Having options is never bad. Not having options is restrictive and lame.

but you do have options, 3rd party they may be. honestly you are just using it as an excuse to complainif you want the start menu back so bad just install one of those 3rd party options and be done with it (and don't say that's too much work or you don't want to bother or you should have to use 3rd party because that's just proving you're making excuses)

The reason Microsoft got rid of the start menu is for consistency. It would be weird to have two "start" menus. Try explaining to people that there are two central locations to launch programs, defeating the purpose of "Central". No, you can't say "Just get rid of the metro start screen" because Metro is windows 8.

If YOU want the start menu so badly, just use 3rd party tools, like Brando212 noted. You don't need to have MS give you everything.

I think it's because Microsoft felt that if they did that, people would not use the start screen. They are going all out with Metro, and obviously want it to become the new OS standard.Although I agree that even an obscure hack allowing the start menu would have placated a lot of people.

Well that's stupid then. A lot of the negativity that I have seen on the internet about Win 8 revolves around the metro start screen. If more people had said they wanted the option to have it like the old one Microsoft would have likely listened. Instead all you see is praise, which is fine. But still.. options never hurt anyone.

Like I said earlier, I think they brought about the changes they wanted correctly with Win 7 super bar. The option to have it one way or the other and a few in between. It just seems really odd to me to not have it.

but you do have options, 3rd party they may be. honestly you are just using it as an excuse to complainif you want the start menu back so bad just install one of those 3rd party options and be done with it (and don't say that's too much work or you don't want to bother or you should have to use 3rd party because that's just proving you're making excuses)

Or I could save my money and in a way tell Microsoft I don't agree with their design decisions. That's an option too. But a sad one because I like all the other changes they have made in Win8. I think my complaint is a valid one so all I can say to you is that if you don't like it, much like with me and the metro start screen, don't buy it, or in this case don't read it.

The reason Microsoft got rid of the start menu is for consistency. It would be weird to have two "start" menus. Try explaining to people that there are two central locations to launch programs, defeating the purpose of "Central". No, you can't say "Just get rid of the metro start screen" because Metro is windows 8.

If YOU want the start menu so badly, just use 3rd party tools, like Brando212 noted. You don't need to have MS give you everything.

They wouldn't need to do that at all though. Have the option hidden away in a right click options menu. Have the metro start menu be on by default and let people who know about it turn it off. Simple. Having the metro start menu on would hide the regular start button we're used to. At least that's how I'd do it.

I don't want to use a third party program that may or may not be updated regularly to obtain the same functionality I have now without having to use a third party program. That just doesn't make sense to me.

@cleverclogs Yup! I bought the high quality soundtracks from Skaven 252, the creator of the music. You can get them from here: http://skaven252.ban...bum/bejeweled-2 They are under creative commons, meaning that you can use them in your own work.

the OPs video is great, and it shows off some of the nice features of Windows 8 too (thanks for the tips about Win-W/Win-F and typing commands into the start menu!).
tbh, the only times in Windows 7 that I ever used the start menu was if (a) I wanted to start an app that wasn't pinned to my taskbar, in which case I typed in the name and pressed enter or (b) was trying to find an app that I forgot the name of (or wouldn't show up in a normal search), which I always found annoying because of the miniscule icons in the start menu, so I welcomed the larger icons with open arms when I saw them IMO it shows about the same amount of information, just it's a lot easier to click on and see it.
though I must say, I liked the DP a lot, but when the CP came out I realized how horrible the DP was actually for mouse/keyboard devices, so it's more than possible that when I see Windows 9 (or even the RTM) I'll end up wondering how I ever managed to use the RP

If I search for something via the start menu it gives a short concise list and most important is that it's not in full screen, which is the biggest reason I dislike the start menu.

(assuming you're saying it distracts you)I disagree; when something pops up on my screen (however small) my attention immediately turns to it, even if it's just for a second or two. If I'm writing something in Word, and I want to look something up, what I'd do in Windows 7 is press the Win key -> a small window pops up and I immediately divert my attention to it -> I type in "Internet Explorer" or something similar -> ensure that what I'm pressing enter for _is_ Internet Explorer -> launch Internet Explorer and divert my attention to it. In Windows 8 that flow would look something ilke: press the Win key -> the screen changes, and I immediately divert my attention to it -> I type in "Internet Explorer" or something similar -> ensure that what I'm pressing enter for _is_ Internet Explorer (which is easier thanks to the large tile) -> launch IE and divert my attention to it. (or, alternatively) press the Win key -> the screen changes, and I immediately divert my attention to it -> type whatever I want to look up -> pick Internet Explorer in the list of search apps -> divert my attention to it.

ofc, if your usage pattern differs from mine (like, say, you don't naturally try and confirm what you're launching is what you want to launch, or if you don't have your attention diverted by smaller windows) then ignore the above (:

(assuming you're saying it distracts you)I disagree; when something pops up on my screen (however small) my attention immediately turns to it, even if it's just for a second or two. If I'm writing something in Word, and I want to look something up, what I'd do in Windows 7 is press the Win key -> a small window pops up and I immediately divert my attention to it -> I type in "Internet Explorer" or something similar -> ensure that what I'm pressing enter for _is_ Internet Explorer -> launch Internet Explorer and divert my attention to it. In Windows 8 that flow would look something ilke: press the Win key -> the screen changes, and I immediately divert my attention to it -> I type in "Internet Explorer" or something similar -> ensure that what I'm pressing enter for _is_ Internet Explorer (which is easier thanks to the large tile) -> launch IE and divert my attention to it. (or, alternatively) press the Win key -> the screen changes, and I immediately divert my attention to it -> type whatever I want to look up -> pick Internet Explorer in the list of search apps -> divert my attention to it.

ofc, if your usage pattern differs from mine (like, say, you don't naturally try and confirm what you're launching is what you want to launch, or if you don't have your attention diverted by smaller windows) then ignore the above (:

You realize there are power users here on Neowin who manage to code in VS while looking stuff up on the internet, watch a movie, talk to a friend on Skype and do a crossword puzzle all at the same time. So a full screen start menu is an issue. For us normal people who focus on one thing at a time Win 8 will be great

No one has answer my question though. Why is having the option such a problem? If everyone said they wanted the option (even if you had no interest in using it) to have it or not then Microsoft would be compelled to give that option. No one has answered this yet.

Having options is never bad. Not having options is restrictive and lame.

Probably so they can get rid of a little bit of legacy code.

It's pretty much a catch-22 tbh. When Microsoft makes something new, people complain. When they give something new but with some legacy bits left over, people complain.